Staff Dynasty Rankings (1 Viewer)

[Taylor]

I find it very odd that members of the staff submit rankings, but then do not follow those rankings at all.

I do understand why one would deviate from them a bit (ex: already have a lot of a particular position, bye week management, etc).

But there are times when their actions in draft, do not come remotely close to their list they've submitted. This obviously begs the question of just how good are these rankings if the staff do not believe in their own individual ones.

For instance, in a recent startup dynasty draft, one of the staff members took Larry Fitzgerald as his first pick in the middle of the 2nd round. According to his very own personal rankings, this staff member has ranked above Fitz in dynasty: Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, Tom Brady, Willis McGahee, Antonio Gates, and Ryan Grant.

Now perhaps the explanation is that the general dynasty rankings are for non-PPR and this particular league is PPR. And I agree that would change things up a bit. But so much so that in his next 3 picks he took his 14th choice, then 33rd ranked player, then 44th?

Meanwhile, over 40 picks into the draft and his 17th ranked dynasty player overall is still sitting there. This doesn't make much sense to me.

This is in no way intended to bash any staff members. In fact, I like this particular staff member to be honest. I just find it very odd that any staff would deviate so much from his very own rankings. He took his 44th overall ranked player when his 16th was available. Again, I could see PPR making someone take their 20th player if it is a WR over their 16th ranked player if it is a RB. But your 44th over your 16th? And what about your 44th ranked player who is a WR over so many other WRs still available that you have ranked higher?

Again, I don't mean to stir any pots. I am just very confused by this. It is certainly not the first time I've seen this either.

 

[ClownDogs]

 

[FantasyTrader]

Too many plausible explanations to really know. If he knew all of his opponents were down on his 16th overall he could have just continued allowing said player to slide knowing he could grab him much later, he knew one of Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, Tom Brady, Willis McGahee, Antonio Gates, and Ryan Grant would be available in the 3rd (but Fitz wouldn't), alcohol abuse and/or drug addiction, he doesn't REALLY believe in his own rankings, his rankings changed (a lot) since they were last published, Alzheimers, etc.

 

[EBF]

Value is very context dependent. Different formats and team setups call for different preferences.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I find it very odd that members of the staff submit rankings, but then do not follow those rankings at all.I do understand why one would deviate from them a bit (ex: already have a lot of a particular position, bye week management, etc).But there are times when their actions in draft, do not come remotely close to their list they've submitted. This obviously begs the question of just how good are these rankings if the staff do not believe in their own individual ones.For instance, in a recent startup dynasty draft, one of the staff members took Larry Fitzgerald as his first pick in the middle of the 2nd round. According to his very own personal rankings, this staff member has ranked above Fitz in dynasty: Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, Tom Brady, Willis McGahee, Antonio Gates, and Ryan Grant.Now perhaps the explanation is that the general dynasty rankings are for non-PPR and this particular league is PPR. And I agree that would change things up a bit. But so much so that in his next 3 picks he took his 14th choice, then 33rd ranked player, then 44th?Meanwhile, over 40 picks into the draft and his 17th ranked dynasty player overall is still sitting there. This doesn't make much sense to me.This is in no way intended to bash any staff members. In fact, I like this particular staff member to be honest. I just find it very odd that any staff would deviate so much from his very own rankings. He took his 44th overall ranked player when his 16th was available. Again, I could see PPR making someone take their 20th player if it is a WR over their 16th ranked player if it is a RB. But your 44th over your 16th? And what about your 44th ranked player who is a WR over so many other WRs still available that you have ranked higher?Again, I don't mean to stir any pots. I am just very confused by this. It is certainly not the first time I've seen this either.

Just because this is how you rank players, it doesn't mean that's how you should draft.For example, I play in a Dynasty league with several staffers. My rookie pick came up and I could have taken RB Tim Hightower in Arizona, who I'm uniquely high on from a ranking perspective. However, I grabbed Mike Hart in Indy. Why? Because others are more high on him than me.The end result? I got Hightower next round, 14 picks later. It was a calculated move, and I got both. Had I drafted according to my rankings and taken Hightower first, no way I would have had both.The goal of a draft is to accumulate the best players that you are high on onto your team and in accordance with the league rules. If the particular league doesn't mesh well with the FBG Dynasty rankings (and some don't) I can also see deviations.By the way, I know I'm not the staffer in question.

 

[Team Legacy]

Rankings do not depict AVERAGE DRAFT POSITION, or at least in my opinion they don't. I can THINK that Mendenhall will have a break out year and be the next great thing at RB, but that doesn't mean I have to take him first.

Also, the rankings are for a very specific type of league, which is shown at the top of the page.

PPR changes the rankings BIG TIME, and the starting requirements impact it as well.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I can THINK that Mendenhall will have a break out year and be the next great thing at RB, but that doesn't mean I have to take him first.

Then one of two things are happening. Either you don't REALLY think Mendy will be the next big thing or you don't trust your own opinion.

 

[SayWhat?]

I can THINK that Mendenhall will have a break out year and be the next great thing at RB, but that doesn't mean I have to take him first.

Then one of two things are happening. Either you don't REALLY think Mendy will be the next big thing or you don't trust your own opinion.

Or he can get him at a later pick.

 

[Jeff Tefertiller]

I find it very odd that members of the staff submit rankings, but then do not follow those rankings at all.I do understand why one would deviate from them a bit (ex: already have a lot of a particular position, bye week management, etc).But there are times when their actions in draft, do not come remotely close to their list they've submitted. This obviously begs the question of just how good are these rankings if the staff do not believe in their own individual ones.For instance, in a recent startup dynasty draft, one of the staff members took Larry Fitzgerald as his first pick in the middle of the 2nd round. According to his very own personal rankings, this staff member has ranked above Fitz in dynasty: Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, Tom Brady, Willis McGahee, Antonio Gates, and Ryan Grant.Now perhaps the explanation is that the general dynasty rankings are for non-PPR and this particular league is PPR. And I agree that would change things up a bit. But so much so that in his next 3 picks he took his 14th choice, then 33rd ranked player, then 44th?Meanwhile, over 40 picks into the draft and his 17th ranked dynasty player overall is still sitting there. This doesn't make much sense to me.This is in no way intended to bash any staff members. In fact, I like this particular staff member to be honest. I just find it very odd that any staff would deviate so much from his very own rankings. He took his 44th overall ranked player when his 16th was available. Again, I could see PPR making someone take their 20th player if it is a WR over their 16th ranked player if it is a RB. But your 44th over your 16th? And what about your 44th ranked player who is a WR over so many other WRs still available that you have ranked higher?Again, I don't mean to stir any pots. I am just very confused by this. It is certainly not the first time I've seen this either.

Since this is me, I will be happy to explain. Comparing PPR leagues to rankings that are not PPR is not really a way to get accurate information. I would be happy to talk strategy on any topic relating to the draft ......... when the draft is over. But, anyone that has seen one of my teams knows that I trade down multiple times, stockpile future picks and stud WRs in PPR leagues, and try to build a dynasty team. Also, using rankings in startups versus general value is a tough thing. So much is relative. Did you notice any positional runs? Do you think that matters? To anyone that drafts, it is a huge deal. If you ever have any specific questions about the draft, feel free to pm me. But, 40 picks into a draft and using non-PPR rankings for a PPR startup is apples and oranges. Do you think that PPR would change the decision whether a WR is worth more than a RB? I do.

 

[Jeff Tefertiller]

I can THINK that Mendenhall will have a break out year and be the next great thing at RB, but that doesn't mean I have to take him first.

Then one of two things are happening. Either you don't REALLY think Mendy will be the next big thing or you don't trust your own opinion.

Or he can get him at a later pick.

exactly. plus using non-ppr rankings for a PPR startup is like buying a Spanish book to learn German. Yeah, some words are close ... but still enough different

 

[KoolKat]

This may be strategy. I remember passing on Matt Schaub in a Rook/FA draft, because I knew he would fall to the next round. In an initial dynasty draft last year I had 2.23 and 3.02, I knew I was in the minority having Larry Fitzgerald as the #1 available so I took 85 with 2.23 and snagged Fitzy with 3.02. The point is, evethough I had Fitzy as #1 I took 85, because I thought it was more likely that the guy picking after me had Fitzy lower on his rankings than me. On the other hand, how can you possibly take someone who you have ranked 28 positions lower than another? I do not understand this. If my #16 is around in the 4th I am taking him regardless of positions. Even if I already had Manning, and Palmer fell to the 4th, I would take Palmer.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I can THINK that Mendenhall will have a break out year and be the next great thing at RB, but that doesn't mean I have to take him first.

Then one of two things are happening. Either you don't REALLY think Mendy will be the next big thing or you don't trust your own opinion.

Or he can get him at a later pick.

I'm under the assumption that if he has the first overall he wouldn't have the 2nd-4th overall. Yes. If he had one of those picks then - of course you could wait and hope Mendy falls.

 

[Jeff Tefertiller]

This may be strategy. I remember passing on Matt Schaub in a Rook/FA draft, because I knew he would fall to the next round. In an initial dynasty draft last year I had 2.23 and 3.02, I knew I was in the minority having Larry Fitzgerald as the #1 available so I took 85 with 2.23 and snagged Fitzy with 3.02. The point is, evethough I had Fitzy as #1 I took 85, because I thought it was more likely that the guy picking after me had Fitzy lower on his rankings than me. On the other hand, how can you possibly take someone who you have ranked 28 positions lower than another? I do not understand this. If my #16 is around in the 4th I am taking him regardless of positions. Even if I already had Manning, and Palmer fell to the 4th, I would take Palmer.

scoring system and starting lineups change things ...

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I find it very odd that members of the staff submit rankings, but then do not follow those rankings at all.I do understand why one would deviate from them a bit (ex: already have a lot of a particular position, bye week management, etc).But there are times when their actions in draft, do not come remotely close to their list they've submitted. This obviously begs the question of just how good are these rankings if the staff do not believe in their own individual ones.For instance, in a recent startup dynasty draft, one of the staff members took Larry Fitzgerald as his first pick in the middle of the 2nd round. According to his very own personal rankings, this staff member has ranked above Fitz in dynasty: Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, Tom Brady, Willis McGahee, Antonio Gates, and Ryan Grant.Now perhaps the explanation is that the general dynasty rankings are for non-PPR and this particular league is PPR. And I agree that would change things up a bit. But so much so that in his next 3 picks he took his 14th choice, then 33rd ranked player, then 44th?Meanwhile, over 40 picks into the draft and his 17th ranked dynasty player overall is still sitting there. This doesn't make much sense to me.This is in no way intended to bash any staff members. In fact, I like this particular staff member to be honest. I just find it very odd that any staff would deviate so much from his very own rankings. He took his 44th overall ranked player when his 16th was available. Again, I could see PPR making someone take their 20th player if it is a WR over their 16th ranked player if it is a RB. But your 44th over your 16th? And what about your 44th ranked player who is a WR over so many other WRs still available that you have ranked higher?Again, I don't mean to stir any pots. I am just very confused by this. It is certainly not the first time I've seen this either.

So who did Jeff draft in front of you?Sounds like you were sniped and are bitter. If that's not the intent, well, ok, but just because you say "I don't mean to stir any pots" doesn't mean that you aren't.Staff have to draft differently than everyone else because they have everything on the table. If you don't expect the unexpected, you'll not understand what a staffer is doing until it is too late.I have every confidence that Jeff T. will have a good draft, and that's just from experience of drafting against him.

 

[Biabreakable]

Overall rankings for dynasty do not reflect the strategy taken during a initial draft in dynasty.

Larry Johnson very easily could be valued as the 16th overall player in dynasty for a team allready intact and strong at other positions. However a team that is drafting with the strategy to trade down and gain value picks for upcoming years may not see enough longevity in Larry Johnson for him to fit their goals and objectives.

If wannabee's 16th ranked player was still available at pick 44 there are a lot of teams passing on that player not just wannabee. That changes the perspective of percieved value for that player in the league, not just for wannabee. So because of his strategy where LJ does not fit in and him also observing that LJ may not have significant trade value enough for him to deviate from his strategy with the intention of trading him. He may have chosen to not deviate for that reason and continued to draft the players that fit what he was trying to do instead of deviating from his strategy to take a player he has highly ranked (in a different format) and throwing off his plan.

I don't think it is that hard to understand this and to me it certainly doesen't mean that wannabee doesen't believe in his rankings. The only thing I find questionable is if the trade value of LJ might have been worth it enough for him to deviate from his plan based on pure value.

So I am guessing that original poster drafted LJ and is now trying to trade him to wannabee based off of his non PPR ranking of him. Sorry guy but wannabee is not the only owner who passed on LJ. If you took him thinking he was worth taking because of trade value you should be aware that a lot of teams passed on him for this league for a reason.

Once the dust settles I think you can find a trade partner that will give you good value for LJ. But probobly not quite what you were hoping for when looking at bee's rankings.

 

[Taylor]

1) With respect to JP's question: no one. He didn't take anyone in front of me that made me bitter. That was not it at all.

2) Most of you are missing the point. I fully understand the basic stuff like:

-- why take a player now if I am pretty sure he will be available with my next pick; or

-- lineup requirements factor in; or

-- who you already have at certain positions will affect who you take with the current pick; and so on.

I get all that. If I didn't, I shouldn't be playing FF.

3) I find it very funny that people like to quickly voice an opinion about the basic idea of a post, without really reading the whole thing. So I will repeat this: I understand why a guy might take his 20th ranked guy over his 16th. I get that. In fact, I would never question it if that were the case. My question stemmed more from the fact that it was the 4th round - and his 16th overall player was still available and he took his 44th ranked player.

So to the 3 or 4 of you that mentioned waiting on a player if you think he will drop as a strategy move: again, I'd agree. But in the 4th round, I don't think anyone expects their 16th overall ranked player to drop to the 5th or 6th rounds.

4) I think most people misinterpreted what I was getting at. I did not post it to nag him or to provoke things. I just simply wanted to understand the major discrepancy, that's all. The ironic thing is, Jeff is one of the staff guys I like (no, not that I don't like the others for those of you looking to jump on that as well). So it really wasn't about getting on him. It was really just about wanting to understand it, b/c the truth is, I've seen this happen a lot: dynasty leagues, redraft leagues, survivor leagues, rookie drafts. So often there seems to be major discrepancies with how they "claim" they feel, with how they actually draft. And yet, I've never posted a thing about it. Why? B/c of all the reasons that I stated, as well as others. Meaning, I get why they would often deviate. This one just seemed way way off.

That's all. Feel free to jump on me again. :X

 

[Beetlejuice]

I'm going to comment based on the thread title, not the direction the thread has taken. I think it is pretty obvious that once a draft begins strategies change based on need, personal ranking, positional runs, etc. Setting a draft board and ignoring all else while going PURELY by BPA based on your own personal board is a foolish strategy.

With that being said....back to the thread title and the staff rankings. For myself, and again this is purely my own opinion, when it comes to dynasty rankings the staff member that I agree with the least is John Norton without question. As for whose opinion I personally value the most, that would be Bloom.

 

[SayWhat?]

1) With respect to JP's question: no one. He didn't take anyone in front of me that made me bitter. That was not it at all.2) Most of you are missing the point. I fully understand the basic stuff like:-- why take a player now if I am pretty sure he will be available with my next pick; or-- lineup requirements factor in; or-- who you already have at certain positions will affect who you take with the current pick; and so on.I get all that. If I didn't, I shouldn't be playing FF.3) I find it very funny that people like to quickly voice an opinion about the basic idea of a post, without really reading the whole thing. So I will repeat this: I understand why a guy might take his 20th ranked guy over his 16th. I get that. In fact, I would never question it if that were the case. My question stemmed more from the fact that it was the 4th round - and his 16th overall player was still available and he took his 44th ranked player.So to the 3 or 4 of you that mentioned waiting on a player if you think he will drop as a strategy move: again, I'd agree. But in the 4th round, I don't think anyone expects their 16th overall ranked player to drop to the 5th or 6th rounds.4) I think most people misinterpreted what I was getting at. I did not post it to nag him or to provoke things. I just simply wanted to understand the major discrepancy, that's all. The ironic thing is, Jeff is one of the staff guys I like (no, not that I don't like the others for those of you looking to jump on that as well). So it really wasn't about getting on him. It was really just about wanting to understand it, b/c the truth is, I've seen this happen a lot: dynasty leagues, redraft leagues, survivor leagues, rookie drafts. So often there seems to be major discrepancies with how they "claim" they feel, with how they actually draft. And yet, I've never posted a thing about it. Why? B/c of all the reasons that I stated, as well as others. Meaning, I get why they would often deviate. This one just seemed way way off.That's all. Feel free to jump on me again. :X

I don't think anyone jumped on you, just a lot of logical reasons given for a very vague question (i.e. "a certain staffer", "16th ranked player", "4th round") that there likely isn't a specific answer for unless you're in the mind of the staffer in question. In addition and as has been previously pointed out, the dynasty rankings are non-ppr while your league is ppr. HUGE difference.

 

[FantasyTrader]

So Taylor has brought up a very articulate point. Is it really very logical to just explain away why a staff member would not select his 16th ranked played at the 44 slot?

I can't really think of a good reason why I would pass on my 16th ranked player at 44 overall.

ppr/non-ppr? No. Values can vary but not to that extreme.

Said player doesn't "fit" with my draft strategy? Come on. I can buy passing on a guy late-2nd because of that. Even in the 3rd because of that. But not taking him in the FOURTH?

Is it not even at all possible that 1) He doesn't believe the guy is the 16th best player or 2) Forgot to check his own rankings and was focused more on other staff's rankings

 

[Jeff Tefertiller]

1) With respect to JP's question: no one. He didn't take anyone in front of me that made me bitter. That was not it at all.

2) Most of you are missing the point. I fully understand the basic stuff like:

-- why take a player now if I am pretty sure he will be available with my next pick; or

-- lineup requirements factor in; or

-- who you already have at certain positions will affect who you take with the current pick; and so on.

I get all that. If I didn't, I shouldn't be playing FF.

3) I find it very funny that people like to quickly voice an opinion about the basic idea of a post, without really reading the whole thing. So I will repeat this: I understand why a guy might take his 20th ranked guy over his 16th. I get that. In fact, I would never question it if that were the case. My question stemmed more from the fact that it was the 4th round - and his 16th overall player was still available and he took his 44th ranked player.

So to the 3 or 4 of you that mentioned waiting on a player if you think he will drop as a strategy move: again, I'd agree. But in the 4th round, I don't think anyone expects their 16th overall ranked player to drop to the 5th or 6th rounds.

4) I think most people misinterpreted what I was getting at. I did not post it to nag him or to provoke things. I just simply wanted to understand the major discrepancy, that's all. The ironic thing is, Jeff is one of the staff guys I like (no, not that I don't like the others for those of you looking to jump on that as well). So it really wasn't about getting on him. It was really just about wanting to understand it, b/c the truth is, I've seen this happen a lot: dynasty leagues, redraft leagues, survivor leagues, rookie drafts. So often there seems to be major discrepancies with how they "claim" they feel, with how they actually draft. And yet, I've never posted a thing about it. Why? B/c of all the reasons that I stated, as well as others. Meaning, I get why they would often deviate. This one just seemed way way off.

That's all. Feel free to jump on me again.

I traded the 4th round pick away for future picks and moved down. I guess we all have our own styles, and I will be happy to explain afterwards, but LJ is too "old" for this team. On teams that I wanted to make a serious run at the playoffs, the LJ all day long. So much is dependent on the team.

 

[-OZ-]

I don't know which players you're looking at, but to use a relevant example of why I might not draft my 16th ranked player, and instead draft my 44th is if we consider Terrell Owens or any other older player, vs. a youngster. I might be working my team for the long haul and prefer drafting Bowe in this league. Nothing to do with PPR, everything to do with how I want to make up my team. If I have TO in another league, and someone offers me Bowe, I might not even consider it, because to me, in that league, TO is worth a lot more, but in the league currently drafting, my plan is different.

Another thing might be if I have 5 leagues, happen to have Larry Johnson in every league, and just don't want him in a 6th. Probably not the best reason to not draft someone, but I've seen it done.

 

[gianmarco]

1) With respect to JP's question: no one. He didn't take anyone in front of me that made me bitter. That was not it at all.

2) Most of you are missing the point. I fully understand the basic stuff like:

-- why take a player now if I am pretty sure he will be available with my next pick; or

-- lineup requirements factor in; or

-- who you already have at certain positions will affect who you take with the current pick; and so on.

I get all that. If I didn't, I shouldn't be playing FF.

3) I find it very funny that people like to quickly voice an opinion about the basic idea of a post, without really reading the whole thing. So I will repeat this: I understand why a guy might take his 20th ranked guy over his 16th. I get that. In fact, I would never question it if that were the case. My question stemmed more from the fact that it was the 4th round - and his 16th overall player was still available and he took his 44th ranked player.

So to the 3 or 4 of you that mentioned waiting on a player if you think he will drop as a strategy move: again, I'd agree. But in the 4th round, I don't think anyone expects their 16th overall ranked player to drop to the 5th or 6th rounds.

4) I think most people misinterpreted what I was getting at. I did not post it to nag him or to provoke things. I just simply wanted to understand the major discrepancy, that's all. The ironic thing is, Jeff is one of the staff guys I like (no, not that I don't like the others for those of you looking to jump on that as well). So it really wasn't about getting on him. It was really just about wanting to understand it, b/c the truth is, I've seen this happen a lot: dynasty leagues, redraft leagues, survivor leagues, rookie drafts. So often there seems to be major discrepancies with how they "claim" they feel, with how they actually draft. And yet, I've never posted a thing about it. Why? B/c of all the reasons that I stated, as well as others. Meaning, I get why they would often deviate. This one just seemed way way off.

That's all. Feel free to jump on me again.

I traded the 4th round pick away for future picks and moved down. I guess we all have our own styles, and I will be happy to explain afterwards, but LJ is too "old" for this team. On teams that I wanted to make a serious run at the playoffs, the LJ all day long. So much is dependent on the team.

This is a very reasonable answer to a very reasonable question. FWIW, I think people did jump the gun on the OP and replied with somewhat "obvious" answers. I think the #16 vs. #44 is a big discrepancy but the reply makes sense and I think that's all he was looking for.Also, noticed the same in our startup dynasty as well at the TE position.

 

[rzrback77]

Starting requirements also play a huge role in the selections. I am not sure but I believe that this league may require only one RB starter. That would be another reason for the discrepancy between a 16th rated overall player being passed over for the 44th at another position where the drafter liked the longevity factor.

 

[gregjcross]

I find it very odd that members of the staff submit rankings, but then do not follow those rankings at all.I do understand why one would deviate from them a bit (ex: already have a lot of a particular position, bye week management, etc).But there are times when their actions in draft, do not come remotely close to their list they've submitted. This obviously begs the question of just how good are these rankings if the staff do not believe in their own individual ones.For instance, in a recent startup dynasty draft, one of the staff members took Larry Fitzgerald as his first pick in the middle of the 2nd round. According to his very own personal rankings, this staff member has ranked above Fitz in dynasty: Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, Tom Brady, Willis McGahee, Antonio Gates, and Ryan Grant.Now perhaps the explanation is that the general dynasty rankings are for non-PPR and this particular league is PPR. And I agree that would change things up a bit. But so much so that in his next 3 picks he took his 14th choice, then 33rd ranked player, then 44th?Meanwhile, over 40 picks into the draft and his 17th ranked dynasty player overall is still sitting there. This doesn't make much sense to me.This is in no way intended to bash any staff members. In fact, I like this particular staff member to be honest. I just find it very odd that any staff would deviate so much from his very own rankings. He took his 44th overall ranked player when his 16th was available. Again, I could see PPR making someone take their 20th player if it is a WR over their 16th ranked player if it is a RB. But your 44th over your 16th? And what about your 44th ranked player who is a WR over so many other WRs still available that you have ranked higher?Again, I don't mean to stir any pots. I am just very confused by this. It is certainly not the first time I've seen this either.

Just because this is how you rank players, it doesn't mean that's how you should draft.For example, I play in a Dynasty league with several staffers. My rookie pick came up and I could have taken RB Tim Hightower in Arizona, who I'm uniquely high on from a ranking perspective. However, I grabbed Mike Hart in Indy. Why? Because others are more high on him than me.The end result? I got Hightower next round, 14 picks later. It was a calculated move, and I got both. Had I drafted according to my rankings and taken Hightower first, no way I would have had both.The goal of a draft is to accumulate the best players that you are high on onto your team and in accordance with the league rules. If the particular league doesn't mesh well with the FBG Dynasty rankings (and some don't) I can also see deviations.By the way, I know I'm not the staffer in question.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

rankings aren't meant to be used as a cheatsheet. they do generally represent player value, but there are many other factors to consider when making a draft pick. these things include things like ADP or where you expect players to go, the scoring rules and lineup requirements, the buildup of your roster and team needs, and also just general strategy. It's also important to consider where the person is drafting (early vs late, end vs middle), where the dropoffs in positional tiers are, injury risk, as well as their goals (i.e., do they want to win right away or would they rather build a team around youth and plan to dominate in 2 or 3 years from now).

whole lot of factors at play when drafting a team that make it very difficult to predict what someone will do, even if you have their player rankings ahead of time.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I would also go so far as there are certain times that if I was giving rankings for others to use in a general fashion... they could be way different then I may use for myself at a particular time.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I think it is a legit question and the net response doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

A lot of times in dynasty rankings around here, people rank the vets too high (happens ALL THE TIME) relative to younger guys. Youth is not valued highly enough. But when it comes to an actual draft or auction etc, some times those same guys are afraid to pull the trigger on the vet because in their heart of hearts, they know that to do well in a dynasty league you want to get a core of guys who will be around and productive 3 or 4 years from now with your higher picks.

Sure you want a young team. Of COURSE you want a young team. That's because young teams are better and young players are better (all things equal). Simple.

If your #14 player is available in the 4th round and you believe he is the the 14th best dynasty player, you should take him. I mean your team only consists of three players at that point right? Same with every other team more or less? If you are THAT locked in to "I want to draft a young team" vs a guy who you think will massively help your team at that early point, it pretty much means you don't really value that guy at #14 and should drop him in your rankings relative to some of the younger talent.

The follow up question would be, at what point do you REALLY feel that that player would be worth a #14 ranking? This mythical league where you don't WANT to draft a relatively young team in an initial dynasty draft? The league where you set out to grab grizzled veterans with your first three picks? Then would you take your #14 guy in the 4th round?

Like the OP, I honestly don't mean to slam. But I've noticed the same phenomenon he has and it has nothing to do with draft strategy (in terms of guys falling/best value etc) or scoring requirements. It has to do with the fact that no one wants to drop a true stud player who happens to be long in the tooth in a dynasty ranking list so far that he would get criticized, but the smart players don't want to draft them where they are ranked either, because they aren't truly "worth" their ranking.

Part of the problem quite honestly, is that people who haven't been in dynasty leagues (or haven't been in them very long) provide a lot of feedback on dynasty rankings. Until you have been through four or five years in a dynasty league, it is hard to grasp how vital (and valuable) youth is in that format.

 

[-OZ-]

The follow up question would be, at what point do you REALLY feel that that player would be worth a #14 ranking? This mythical league where you don't WANT to draft a relatively young team in an initial dynasty draft? The league where you set out to grab grizzled veterans with your first three picks? Then would you take your #14 guy in the 4th round?Like the OP, I honestly don't mean to slam. But I've noticed the same phenomenon he has and it has nothing to do with draft strategy (in terms of guys falling/best value etc) or scoring requirements. It has to do with the fact that no one wants to drop a true stud player who happens to be long in the tooth in a dynasty ranking list so far that he would get criticized, but the smart players don't want to draft them where they are ranked either, because they aren't truly "worth" their ranking.Part of the problem quite honestly, is that people who haven't been in dynasty leagues (or haven't been in them very long) provide a lot of feedback on dynasty rankings. Until you have been through four or five years in a dynasty league, it is hard to grasp how vital (and valuable) youth is in that format.

My answer to your follow-up question is with established leagues. Some of us like to win now with established veterans in some leagues, while prepping for the future in others, it's more fun IMO to utilize different strategies. Also, in many leagues, I'd rather win now and rebuild later vs. build up now and hope to win later. If I'm in a win now mode, I'm simply not trading TO for too many WRs, but in an initial dynasty or in a league where I'm building, I wouldn't trade much for TO. He just wouldn't fit with my scheme.Now, you make a good point, with only 3 players on the roster, you can probably adjust your plan fairly easily. If guys that I see having 2-4 years left at a high enough level for me to rank high start dropping far, I'm probably going to draft them and go for the wins early. I'd win now and do the rebuild in years 3-6, while most people prefer to build up and "dominate" in years 3-6. Being a contrarian in FF, as well as the stock market often pays off big. Some people just don't like to adjust, sometimes for good reasons. I've played dynasty leagues for a long time now and there's different ways to do it, in some leagues, youth is severely undervalued, in some leagues, it's greatly overvalued. Adjust accordingly.

 

[Caveman_Nick]

I'm going to comment based on the thread title, not the direction the thread has taken. I think it is pretty obvious that once a draft begins strategies change based on need, personal ranking, positional runs, etc. Setting a draft board and ignoring all else while going PURELY by BPA based on your own personal board is a foolish strategy.

With that being said....back to the thread title and the staff rankings. For myself, and again this is purely my own opinion, when it comes to dynasty rankings the staff member that I agree with the least is John Norton without question. As for whose opinion I personally value the most, that would be Bloom.

This is a very interesting thread to me. A couple of years ago I had made some similar arguments in a different forum.Rankings are obviously subject to influence of factors such as scoring, line-up requirements, league size, and even draft position. If you don't have another pick for 20 picks and one particular guy fits into your strategy better than the guys in front of him, then by all means you should take that guy.

That said, I have a pretty strong disagreement with the post I have quoted. The first reason is that when I am going into a draft I make adjustments to my board based on the scoring, line-up requirements, league size, and if possible trends that I might be aware of from dealing with people in other circumstances or past seasons if I am drafting for a redraft. Generally speaking, though, whether I am drafting for a dynasty, limited keeper, or redraft, I want to rank the players in the order I would prefer to have them on my team.

Overlooking a player you have ranked highly because you think he will slip often results in getting burned. If you think a player is that good, then there's a pretty good chance you league mates might as well. At least one of them. Of course, this is considering that you have a group os skilled players in the league

I think it is more foolish to not take your best available players while BPAs are still "obvious" based on your rankings. I don't do rankings with the approach that I should second guess myself in the middle of the draft. I do them as my best guess of success. Most importantly, I believe this works for me because I use a VBD system with 2 kinds of value concepts guiding my choices (not wanting to get into that at the moment). I use historical data combines with my best guesses of future trends for players to create a list, and then I work from it.

In my most recent Dynasty start-up draft, which I have detailed in a blog on another site, I used this strategy. I drafted BPA according to my sheet for the first 4 rounds, and then drafted very close to BPA adjusting for roster needs somewhat until round 11. After round 11 things became a little bit more free flowing, but I always kept my eye on who the BPA was and took that player unless there was someone I thought I needed to draft (Say, the pick of Brady Quinn as a safeguard for Derek Anderson).

When all was said and done, I had the most players scoring over 200 pts per season in each of the past 2 years, and the most players in the top 200 scorers in each of the last 2 years. I also had almost every player on my roster being 29 or younger, with a large majority being 27 or younger. And I had taken that into account in my rankings.

My point is that if you take the time ahead of time to be careful and deliberate about how you rank players, and you have faith in your skill in doing so, then drafting BPA (or a rough approximation thereof) is not a foolish strategy at all.

I am trying to work with the spirit of Beetlejuice's post and not the literal statement. I believe he did not mean that you take BPA at every draft slot and ignore roster requirements and starting needs.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

The follow up question would be, at what point do you REALLY feel that that player would be worth a #14 ranking? This mythical league where you don't WANT to draft a relatively young team in an initial dynasty draft? The league where you set out to grab grizzled veterans with your first three picks? Then would you take your #14 guy in the 4th round?Like the OP, I honestly don't mean to slam. But I've noticed the same phenomenon he has and it has nothing to do with draft strategy (in terms of guys falling/best value etc) or scoring requirements. It has to do with the fact that no one wants to drop a true stud player who happens to be long in the tooth in a dynasty ranking list so far that he would get criticized, but the smart players don't want to draft them where they are ranked either, because they aren't truly "worth" their ranking.Part of the problem quite honestly, is that people who haven't been in dynasty leagues (or haven't been in them very long) provide a lot of feedback on dynasty rankings. Until you have been through four or five years in a dynasty league, it is hard to grasp how vital (and valuable) youth is in that format.

My answer to your follow-up question is with established leagues. Some of us like to win now with established veterans in some leagues, while prepping for the future in others, it's more fun IMO to utilize different strategies. Also, in many leagues, I'd rather win now and rebuild later vs. build up now and hope to win later. If I'm in a win now mode, I'm simply not trading TO for too many WRs, but in an initial dynasty or in a league where I'm building, I wouldn't trade much for TO. He just wouldn't fit with my scheme.Now, you make a good point, with only 3 players on the roster, you can probably adjust your plan fairly easily. If guys that I see having 2-4 years left at a high enough level for me to rank high start dropping far, I'm probably going to draft them and go for the wins early. I'd win now and do the rebuild in years 3-6, while most people prefer to build up and "dominate" in years 3-6. Being a contrarian in FF, as well as the stock market often pays off big. Some people just don't like to adjust, sometimes for good reasons. I've played dynasty leagues for a long time now and there's different ways to do it, in some leagues, youth is severely undervalued, in some leagues, it's greatly overvalued. Adjust accordingly.

I recognize that there are different approaches (and paths to success) for a dynasty league. But for these dynasty rankings, we are trying to get at something close (as close as we can get anyway while missing a lot of relevant details about a league) to overall relative value of these guys.There is plenty of room for going vet vs youth and rebuild later, but you can allow for that STRATEGY and still try to keep accurate value. Strategy is not the same thing as general value. A player may be worth more to you in a particular situation that he would otherwise be worth in a general sense. But that doesn't mean his "general" value should be higher when you do a realistic, generic assessment of him. If you love the vets, feel free to grab guys like Owens etc. I've got no problem with that. But if you do it with a 1st round pick in an initial draft, at least be prepared for the possibility of a Sean Alexander - a top 3 or 4 dynasty guy (on many lists - not mine) going into one year and basically worthless with no starting gig the next.Back to the OP, as you admit, it's kind of a stretch to think that that early in an initial draft you are locked into a strategy that would prevent you from grabbing a guy with that much potential value that late. This scenario isn't one where you have an established team in an established league and are looking to make a specific move at a specific time. An initial dynasty draft or auction is as pure a case of "get the best/most valuable dynasty players as you can" as there ever will be. So what is Mr. #14's REAL value to that drafter?

 

[Q-Bert]

There is some confusion about what actually happened and where the various players were ranked but if this is really about a guy taking his 44th ranked player over his 16th ranked player I think it makes sense to look at the players in question.

He has Willis McGahee ranked 16th for non-ppr leagues and Wes Welker ranked 44th for non-ppr leagues. The draft in question was for a ppr scoring league. I would have a hard time coming up with two players whose value would be most affected by a switch from a non-ppr to a ppr league. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

There is some confusion about what actually happened and where the various players were ranked but if this is really about a guy taking his 44th ranked player over his 16th ranked player I think it makes sense to look at the players in question.He has Willis McGahee ranked 16th for non-ppr leagues and Wes Welker ranked 44th for non-ppr leagues. The draft in question was for a ppr scoring league. I would have a hard time coming up with two players whose value would be most affected by a switch from a non-ppr to a ppr league. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

That does narrow the gap some since those two are probably on the extreme ends of receptions. Makes a little more sense in that scenario. Still seems a pretty extreme drop to me though.

 

[jwb]

Like the OP, I honestly don't mean to slam. But I've noticed the same phenomenon he has and it has nothing to do with draft strategy (in terms of guys falling/best value etc) or scoring requirements. It has to do with the fact that no one wants to drop a true stud player who happens to be long in the tooth in a dynasty ranking list so far that he would get criticized, but the smart players don't want to draft them where they are ranked either, because they aren't truly "worth" their ranking.

I just kind of assumed this, to be honest. I look at the rankings and see LJ at 12 (or whatever - they all have him ranked between 8-18), and I'm thinking "no way any of these guys takes him that early in a startup".But I also realize these rankings aren't simply "startup draft rankings" (although a lot of people use them as such) - they are also rankings in regards to trades, etc. LJ very well might be the 14th ranked player in someone's mind (in regards to overall value, which includes trading to win this year, etc), but not the 14th best in a "build your team around him" startup draft.

I'll bet if there were a separate "startup draft rankings", LJ would be a LOT lower. However, then you'd need startup for ppr, startup for idp... it gets silly.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

There is some confusion about what actually happened and where the various players were ranked but if this is really about a guy taking his 44th ranked player over his 16th ranked player I think it makes sense to look at the players in question.He has Willis McGahee ranked 16th for non-ppr leagues and Wes Welker ranked 44th for non-ppr leagues. The draft in question was for a ppr scoring league. I would have a hard time coming up with two players whose value would be most affected by a switch from a non-ppr to a ppr league. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

That does narrow the gap some since those two are probably on the extreme ends of receptions. Makes a little more sense in that scenario. Still seems a pretty extreme drop to me though.

Don't forget that the starters are much more flexible as well with 1-4 RB and 1-4 WR.Couple that with PPR and I can see a number of strategies.Regardless, I wouldn't appreciate a thread like this in a new league. The OP is basically asking someone to defend both their rankings available to the public AND to explain their draft strategies within a draft that both are actively participating. Yet the OP has the nerve to say that he's not stirring the pot and posts the thread with an alias.Something tells me not to expect any trades going down between these two teams for quite a while going forward.

 

[Taylor]

There is some confusion about what actually happened and where the various players were ranked but if this is really about a guy taking his 44th ranked player over his 16th ranked player I think it makes sense to look at the players in question.

He has Willis McGahee ranked 16th for non-ppr leagues and Wes Welker ranked 44th for non-ppr leagues. The draft in question was for a ppr scoring league. I would have a hard time coming up with two players whose value would be most affected by a switch from a non-ppr to a ppr league. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

That does narrow the gap some since those two are probably on the extreme ends of receptions. Makes a little more sense in that scenario. Still seems a pretty extreme drop to me though.

Don't forget that the starters are much more flexible as well with 1-4 RB and 1-4 WR.Couple that with PPR and I can see a number of strategies.

Regardless, I wouldn't appreciate a thread like this in a new league. The OP is basically asking someone to defend both their rankings available to the public AND to explain their draft strategies within a draft that both are actively participating. Yet the OP has the nerve to say that he's not stirring the pot and posts the thread with an alias.

Something tells me not to expect any trades going down between these two teams for quite a while going forward.

Personally, I find this post to be in bad taste...especially coming from a staff member. But that's just my two cents and I'm sure that all the guys that like to jump on staff bandwagons will have a field day with me saying that.In addition, this post is more confrontational, more abrasive, and stirs the pot more than anything from my posts.

(Not to mention your post sort of sells out (ex: the alias part), which is kind of uncool for a staff member to do just b/c he has those privileges of checking.)

I had a legitimate question. All I wanted was an answer.

You seem to be more offended by this thread than the actual staff member who made those picks.

If my original post was not appropriate for the Shark Pool football forum, all you had to do was delete it and let me know.

I have never wanted to rub FBG the wrong way. I like this site. I like the staff. I like these forums. So again, if my post was somehow inappropriate (which given the things you've stated, you obviously feel it was), all you had to do was tell me so, instead of escalate an issue. I would have been fine with that.

 

[Banger]

There is some confusion about what actually happened and where the various players were ranked but if this is really about a guy taking his 44th ranked player over his 16th ranked player I think it makes sense to look at the players in question.

He has Willis McGahee ranked 16th for non-ppr leagues and Wes Welker ranked 44th for non-ppr leagues. The draft in question was for a ppr scoring league. I would have a hard time coming up with two players whose value would be most affected by a switch from a non-ppr to a ppr league. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

That does narrow the gap some since those two are probably on the extreme ends of receptions. Makes a little more sense in that scenario. Still seems a pretty extreme drop to me though.

Don't forget that the starters are much more flexible as well with 1-4 RB and 1-4 WR.Couple that with PPR and I can see a number of strategies.

Regardless, I wouldn't appreciate a thread like this in a new league. The OP is basically asking someone to defend both their rankings available to the public AND to explain their draft strategies within a draft that both are actively participating. Yet the OP has the nerve to say that he's not stirring the pot and posts the thread with an alias.

Something tells me not to expect any trades going down between these two teams for quite a while going forward.

Personally, I find this post to be in bad taste...especially coming from a staff member. But that's just my two cents and I'm sure that all the guys that like to jump on staff bandwagons will have a field day with me saying that.In addition, this post is more confrontational, more abrasive, and stirs the pot more than anything from my posts.

(Not to mention your post sort of sells out (ex: the alias part), which is kind of uncool for a staff member to do just b/c he has those privileges of checking.)

I had a legitimate question. All I wanted was an answer.

You seem to be more offended by this thread than the actual staff member who made those picks.

If my original post was not appropriate for the Shark Pool football forum, all you had to do was delete it and let me know.

I have never wanted to rub FBG the wrong way. I like this site. I like the staff. I like these forums. So again, if my post was somehow inappropriate (which given the things you've stated, you obviously feel it was), all you had to do was tell me so, instead of escalate an issue. I would have been fine with that.

so why the alias then?

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

There is some confusion about what actually happened and where the various players were ranked but if this is really about a guy taking his 44th ranked player over his 16th ranked player I think it makes sense to look at the players in question.

He has Willis McGahee ranked 16th for non-ppr leagues and Wes Welker ranked 44th for non-ppr leagues. The draft in question was for a ppr scoring league. I would have a hard time coming up with two players whose value would be most affected by a switch from a non-ppr to a ppr league. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

That does narrow the gap some since those two are probably on the extreme ends of receptions. Makes a little more sense in that scenario. Still seems a pretty extreme drop to me though.

Don't forget that the starters are much more flexible as well with 1-4 RB and 1-4 WR.Couple that with PPR and I can see a number of strategies.

Regardless, I wouldn't appreciate a thread like this in a new league. The OP is basically asking someone to defend both their rankings available to the public AND to explain their draft strategies within a draft that both are actively participating. Yet the OP has the nerve to say that he's not stirring the pot and posts the thread with an alias.

Something tells me not to expect any trades going down between these two teams for quite a while going forward.

Personally, I find this post to be in bad taste...especially coming from a staff member. But that's just my two cents and I'm sure that all the guys that like to jump on staff bandwagons will have a field day with me saying that.In addition, this post is more confrontational, more abrasive, and stirs the pot more than anything from my posts.

(Not to mention your post sort of sells out (ex: the alias part), which is kind of uncool for a staff member to do just b/c he has those privileges of checking.)

I had a legitimate question. All I wanted was an answer.

You seem to be more offended by this thread than the actual staff member who made those picks.

If my original post was not appropriate for the Shark Pool football forum, all you had to do was delete it and let me know.

I have never wanted to rub FBG the wrong way. I like this site. I like the staff. I like these forums. So again, if my post was somehow inappropriate (which given the things you've stated, you obviously feel it was), all you had to do was tell me so, instead of escalate an issue. I would have been fine with that.

"Taylor",You asked for an answer to a reasonable question, but your methodology is what I find abrasive.

You knew who it was and there's plenty of ways to ask him directly. Rather than that, you chose to go out of your way to post with an alias and throw him under the bus.

I have no issue with you asking the question, but to post about it in an open forum and not even let him know that you were asking him about it raises questions about your intention. If you really wanted to ask him about it, you could have. It isn't like we don't have email or PM boxes.

Call me crazy, but if I have a question for someone, I tend to ask them directly.

Take it however you like.

 

[Taylor]

There is some confusion about what actually happened and where the various players were ranked but if this is really about a guy taking his 44th ranked player over his 16th ranked player I think it makes sense to look at the players in question.

He has Willis McGahee ranked 16th for non-ppr leagues and Wes Welker ranked 44th for non-ppr leagues. The draft in question was for a ppr scoring league. I would have a hard time coming up with two players whose value would be most affected by a switch from a non-ppr to a ppr league. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

That does narrow the gap some since those two are probably on the extreme ends of receptions. Makes a little more sense in that scenario. Still seems a pretty extreme drop to me though.

Don't forget that the starters are much more flexible as well with 1-4 RB and 1-4 WR.Couple that with PPR and I can see a number of strategies.

Regardless, I wouldn't appreciate a thread like this in a new league. The OP is basically asking someone to defend both their rankings available to the public AND to explain their draft strategies within a draft that both are actively participating. Yet the OP has the nerve to say that he's not stirring the pot and posts the thread with an alias.

Something tells me not to expect any trades going down between these two teams for quite a while going forward.

Personally, I find this post to be in bad taste...especially coming from a staff member. But that's just my two cents and I'm sure that all the guys that like to jump on staff bandwagons will have a field day with me saying that.In addition, this post is more confrontational, more abrasive, and stirs the pot more than anything from my posts.

(Not to mention your post sort of sells out (ex: the alias part), which is kind of uncool for a staff member to do just b/c he has those privileges of checking.)

I had a legitimate question. All I wanted was an answer.

You seem to be more offended by this thread than the actual staff member who made those picks.

If my original post was not appropriate for the Shark Pool football forum, all you had to do was delete it and let me know.

I have never wanted to rub FBG the wrong way. I like this site. I like the staff. I like these forums. So again, if my post was somehow inappropriate (which given the things you've stated, you obviously feel it was), all you had to do was tell me so, instead of escalate an issue. I would have been fine with that.

"Taylor",You asked for an answer to a reasonable question, but your methodology is what I find abrasive.

You knew who it was and there's plenty of ways to ask him directly. Rather than that, you chose to go out of your way to post with an alias and throw him under the bus.

I have no issue with you asking the question, but to post about it in an open forum and not even let him know that you were asking him about it raises questions about your intention. If you really wanted to ask him about it, you could have. It isn't like we don't have email or PM boxes.

Call me crazy, but if I have a question for someone, I tend to ask them directly.

Take it however you like.

Jeff,All I can say is WOW. Seriously, man.

1) You still never addressed using your privileges to throw me under the bus. Ironic considering that you are so offended by guys throwing other guys under the bus - only to go and then do the very thing you are complaining of. That's the pot calling the kettle black. In complaining about it - you do it. Go figure.

2) Speaking of throwing under the bus - I swear to you that was not my intention. If it was, I'd:

-- mention the very staff member I was referring to (something others have done a lot in other posts), but I stayed away from that;

-- mention the very league I was referring to (but I specifically didn't post it in the thread about that league b/c the point was NOT to draw attention to who it was - it was more about just reasons that perhaps I hadn't considered (though that was fruitless as most people just responded with the very reasons I said I already considered)).

3) For those that did know which league I was referring to - the alias thing really didn't matter. (And I mean REALLY didn't matter. It was beyond obvious for those that are in the league.)

4) You claim you have no problem with my question, only about how I went about it. You even wrote, "You asked for an answer to a reasonable question, but your methodology is what I find abrasive."

My methodology?!?! See above. Again, I didn't use the staff member's name. I didn't refer to which league. I didn't even say who that 44th ranked player was (b/c I didn't want a tangential discussion to develop about whether player A is better than B or not). I brought it up in vague terms so people could respond to the issue - not tangential issues.

So I was trying to be careful about my methodology. You seem to be in more of an uproar about it than anyone else.

I guess the part that I find most ironic is your specific complaint about "throwing under the bus." In one instance you complain about that, and in the next you do it yourself by telling all readers of this thread that I used an alias (which again, was not a secret to anyone in that league).

 

[jwb]

You knew who it was and there's plenty of ways to ask him directly. Rather than that, you chose to go out of your way to post with an alias and throw him under the bus.

I have no issue with you asking the question, but to post about it in an open forum and not even let him know that you were asking him about it raises questions about your intention. If you really wanted to ask him about it, you could have. It isn't like we don't have email or PM boxes.

Call me crazy, but if I have a question for someone, I tend to ask them directly.

Take it however you like.

But he didn't seem to have a direct question for the drafter - it seemed he was more throwing out a legitimate discussion question to the forum. I don't see how his post threw anyone under the bus except that it brings up the somewhat uncomfortable question of "someone ranks this guy really high, but when the chance comes to take him, he repeatedly passes on it - so is it fair to question how we should view his rankings?" It's a reasonable question that seems to have struck a bit of a nerve with a few (I mean, you answered his post with an intelligent, detailed answer at first, but then, unprovoked, felt compelled to answer again essentially accusing him of being bitter at being sniped?? The OP didn't post a second time at that point, so your second, somewhat accusatory post seems odd. If anything stirred the pot, it was that post.)

To me, this question makes for good discussion - it's somewhat akin to someone endorsing coke but drinking pepsi when given a choice, and people are asking why (maybe Pepsi goes better with the particular meal.. whatever). But it's a fair question.

That said, a few posts above, I essentially defend the staff saying I felt the rankings aren't really meant to be all inclusive "startup dynasty" rankings. I just drafted with some staff, and certainly didn't expect them to completely follow their rankings, but that doesn't mean that the topic doesn't make for good discussion.

 

[switz]

I find it very odd that members of the staff submit rankings, but then do not follow those rankings at all.

The problem is that projecting where a player will finish the season is NOT the same as where a player will be drafted.

 

[Slinger]

All I can say is WOW. Seriously, man.

That's what I thought when I read the original post.

Value is very context dependent. Different formats and team setups call for different preferences.

/thread

 

[Hear-the-Footsteps]

Okay, I am going to throw myself on the tracks here so to speak. The OP is me.

While I appreciate many of the remarks made by posters such as FantasyTrader, KoolKat, Gianmarco, HolySchneikes, CavemanNick, JWB, etc. - and agree with many of them, I have to admit that I still regret posting the original post anyway.

(Not to be accused of agreeing with everything they said (though I do happen to agree with a lot of it), I agree with the parts about it being a legitimate question; and wanted to pose it to the forum as a discussion point; etc.)

Nonetheless, I feel some people are extremely offended by my post. And even if I think it is a bit of an over-reaction, as though I committed some major life injustice, I apologize for it anyway. The key issue seems to be: why did I post under an alias.

Well, that was done for the same reason I didn't say who the staff member was. The point wasn't to draw attention to who we are specifically. The point was to get a discussion going on why one would deviate so much. Some responded with obvious answers like scoring system, lineup requirements, etc. And others actually jumped in a little deeper with their thoughts (which is what I was looking for).

Afterall, if I was looking to "out" this staff member, I could have just said who it was. I've seen this done a ton in this very forum. Guys come here all the time and say they don't get staff member so-and-so's rankings.

I suppose part of the problem was that it was easy for others to figure out who the staff member was. But by that same rationale, it was easy for those same people to figure out who I was. In fact, the very picture I use in that league is of Lawrence TAYLOR, on a banner with HTF. So it wasn't exactly rocket science for those in the league to realize who I was either.

Nonetheless, if that offended JT - my bad, I apologize.

I honestly did not mean to piss anyone off. My intentions were never to offend anyone.

And it appears some realize this, while others still might question it.

To those that question it and, more importantly, to JT himself (since he came here and acknowledged he is the staff member): sorry.

I didn't look at it as though I was calling you out. In fact, that's why I kept your identity a secret (and mine as well). I wanted a real discussion to hopefully ensue. But so often that doesn't happen despite an OP's good intentions. And yes, again, I should have realized that those that took the time and wanted to put in the effort could figure out it was you. But likewise, with a little effort to figure out his identity - they could have done the same with me. (I suppose I was naive to think that maybe, just maybe, people would come into a thread and just talk about that issue. Without diverting the topic. Without bringing up tangential matters. Without trying to figure out who the staff member was. Without trying to figure out who Taylor was.)

To those of you wondering why I don't just explain myself to JT...

Why come here and do it since it will inevitably get more posts going in this thread which has taken such a turn off topic already? Well, I want you to know that I have. I have PM'd JT and engaged in a rather long conversation with him on IM. We've each explained our thought process with respect to this and I've apologized several times.

I have no problem with him. In fact, I have no problem with any staff member. I like the staff here. I've been here for several years now (even before the year/# to the left may indicate).

I do think some were a little overly sensitive to this. If my intention was to truly out someone or throw them under the bus - I would have simply done so. I would have said who the staff was and saved everyone who cared enough to do so, the trouble of trying to figure it out. I would have said what league it was as well.

So again, if I had realized anyone would be bothered by my OP this much - I would not have done it.

I've apologized quite a bit. I've explained what my intentions were quite a bit. I've explained that I did not mean to cause any adverse reactions. And to be honest, I still stand by the fact that I am not the one that brought this thread to another level. (Hopefully I will not get berated for that. It is my honest opinion that I was not the abrasive one. But that is neither here nor there.)

Nonetheless, if I had realized any of that abrasiveness would have followed my post - I would not have made it. So I apologize for that as well.

So in addition to my PM to Jeff and my lengthy IM conversation with him, I am using this thread to publicly apologize.

Jeff, I have no problems with you. And I didn't mean to cause you any grief over this.

 

[Banger]

Okay, I am going to throw myself on the tracks here so to speak. The OP is me.While I appreciate many of the remarks made by posters such as FantasyTrader, KoolKat, Gianmarco, HolySchneikes, CavemanNick, JWB, etc. - and agree with many of them, I have to admit that I still regret posting the original post anyway.(Not to be accused of agreeing with everything they said (though I do happen to agree with a lot of it), I agree with the parts about it being a legitimate question; and wanted to pose it to the forum as a discussion point; etc.)Nonetheless, I feel some people are extremely offended by my post. And even if I think it is a bit of an over-reaction, as though I committed some major life injustice, I apologize for it anyway. The key issue seems to be: why did I post under an alias.Well, that was done for the same reason I didn't say who the staff member was. The point wasn't to draw attention to who we are specifically. The point was to get a discussion going on why one would deviate so much. Some responded with obvious answers like scoring system, lineup requirements, etc. And others actually jumped in a little deeper with their thoughts (which is what I was looking for).Afterall, if I was looking to "out" this staff member, I could have just said who it was. I've seen this done a ton in this very forum. Guys come here all the time and say they don't get staff member so-and-so's rankings.I suppose part of the problem was that it was easy for others to figure out who the staff member was. But by that same rationale, it was easy for those same people to figure out who I was. In fact, the very picture I use in that league is of Lawrence TAYLOR, on a banner with HTF. So it wasn't exactly rocket science for those in the league to realize who I was either.Nonetheless, if that offended JT - my bad, I apologize.I honestly did not mean to piss anyone off. My intentions were never to offend anyone.And it appears some realize this, while others still might question it.To those that question it and, more importantly, to JT himself (since he came here and acknowledged he is the staff member): sorry.I didn't look at it as though I was calling you out. In fact, that's why I kept your identity a secret (and mine as well). I wanted a real discussion to hopefully ensue. But so often that doesn't happen despite an OP's good intentions. And yes, again, I should have realized that those that took the time and wanted to put in the effort could figure out it was you. But likewise, with a little effort to figure out his identity - they could have done the same with me. (I suppose I was naive to think that maybe, just maybe, people would come into a thread and just talk about that issue. Without diverting the topic. Without bringing up tangential matters. Without trying to figure out who the staff member was. Without trying to figure out who Taylor was.)To those of you wondering why I don't just explain myself to JT...Why come here and do it since it will inevitably get more posts going in this thread which has taken such a turn off topic already? Well, I want you to know that I have. I have PM'd JT and engaged in a rather long conversation with him on IM. We've each explained our thought process with respect to this and I've apologized several times.I have no problem with him. In fact, I have no problem with any staff member. I like the staff here. I've been here for several years now (even before the year/# to the left may indicate).I do think some were a little overly sensitive to this. If my intention was to truly out someone or throw them under the bus - I would have simply done so. I would have said who the staff was and saved everyone who cared enough to do so, the trouble of trying to figure it out. I would have said what league it was as well.So again, if I had realized anyone would be bothered by my OP this much - I would not have done it.I've apologized quite a bit. I've explained what my intentions were quite a bit. I've explained that I did not mean to cause any adverse reactions. And to be honest, I still stand by the fact that I am not the one that brought this thread to another level. (Hopefully I will not get berated for that. It is my honest opinion that I was not the abrasive one. But that is neither here nor there.)Nonetheless, if I had realized any of that abrasiveness would have followed my post - I would not have made it. So I apologize for that as well.So in addition to my PM to Jeff and my lengthy IM conversation with him, I am using this thread to publicly apologize.Jeff, I have no problems with you. And I didn't mean to cause you any grief over this.

 

[FantasyTrader]

So to everyone explaining away passing on your 16th overall player at the 44 spot, doesn't this beg the question of how useful rankings are? I mean, if dozens of variables are constantly at play, isn't it naive to think we'd ever run into a draft scenario where the player REMAINED our 16th most valued player?

Or maybe I'm just taking it all a step to far.

 

[Buckeyedawgs]

this thread proves 2 points. 1. don't relay on anyones cheat sheets except your own. 2. If you want to out smart and beat your competion and so called experts like I do year in and year out you certainly don;t want to relay on the information they provide you. hehe

I subscribe to FBG for the tips and information they provide.

In no way do I actually use anything they put out as something to follow.

I do use there cheatseats to predict what others will do. Because I am fully aware

most owners in my leagues follow these things. That's where I have a huge advantage! And that's why I make tons of money each and every year and beat these guys year in and year out at there own game.

 

[TheOriginalDoubledown]

I find it very odd that members of the staff submit rankings, but then do not follow those rankings at all.

I do understand why one would deviate from them a bit (ex: already have a lot of a particular position, bye week management, etc).

But there are times when their actions in draft, do not come remotely close to their list they've submitted. This obviously begs the question of just how good are these rankings if the staff do not believe in their own individual ones.

For instance, in a recent startup dynasty draft, one of the staff members took Larry Fitzgerald as his first pick in the middle of the 2nd round. According to his very own personal rankings, this staff member has ranked above Fitz in dynasty: Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, Tom Brady, Willis McGahee, Antonio Gates, and Ryan Grant.

Now perhaps the explanation is that the general dynasty rankings are for non-PPR and this particular league is PPR. And I agree that would change things up a bit. But so much so that in his next 3 picks he took his 14th choice, then 33rd ranked player, then 44th?

Meanwhile, over 40 picks into the draft and his 17th ranked dynasty player overall is still sitting there. This doesn't make much sense to me.

This is in no way intended to bash any staff members. In fact, I like this particular staff member to be honest. I just find it very odd that any staff would deviate so much from his very own rankings. He took his 44th overall ranked player when his 16th was available. Again, I could see PPR making someone take their 20th player if it is a WR over their 16th ranked player if it is a RB. But your 44th over your 16th? And what about your 44th ranked player who is a WR over so many other WRs still available that you have ranked higher?

Again, I don't mean to stir any pots. I am just very confused by this. It is certainly not the first time I've seen this either.

I think perhaps the bold statements make it appear as though stirring the pot was indeed your intention. I'm certainly in no way saying that was the case, but I can certainly see why some may have thought so.Did it ever occur to you that by making these bold statements, and making the staff member involved anonymous, it may have appeared to some that it was the credibility of the FootballGuys site that you were attacking? That could be the reason you incurred such negative fanfare from the moderator.

You have obviously made it clear with your last post that this was never your intention. Truth for each person is usually based on their perception of a situation. Sometimes you have to use syntax that clearly defines your intention and eliminates any possible perceptions to the contrary.

 

[Thunder]

I knew all along you guys had Forte #1 in the rookie draft rankings.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

So to everyone explaining away passing on your 16th overall player at the 44 spot, doesn't this beg the question of how useful rankings are? I mean, if dozens of variables are constantly at play, isn't it naive to think we'd ever run into a draft scenario where the player REMAINED our 16th most valued player?Or maybe I'm just taking it all a step to far.

You and others are missing some important points:The FBG dynasty rankings are NOT PPR, while the league that is the basis of this thread is a PPR league. BIG difference. The FBG rankings are based on starting 2 RB, 3 WR, and 1 TE, while this particular league starts 1 RB, 1 WR, 1 TE, and 3 flex (RB/WR/TE). Again, BIG difference. If you can start 4 WRs in a PPR league in which you only are required to start 1 RB, and when you consider the average length of career between a RB and a WR, a WR has much more value than they would in a standard league that starts 2 RBs. Jeff T, the staff member in question, has a certain strategy he uses when he is in an initial dynasty draft, as he has explained. All of the above are part of the answer, but the key thing is the rankings are very generic and once you change lineups and scoring from those used in the rankings, the value of players can change dramatically. This doesn't even factor in the minute by minute changes in the draft as it proceeds nor does it factor in a persons specific strategy. As mentioned in a previous post, overall rankings also can't factor in position runs and roster breakdown. There are too many variables in rankings even before you factor in difference scoring systems and different lineup requirements. The difference in FBG lineup used in rankings and the lineup requirements in Jeff's league are night and day different.The questions asked in this thread are why we always ask for league parameters in the assistant coaches forum, because, regarding rankings, it is not one size fits all. The 16th overall player in FBG scoring and FBG lineup requirements is definitely not the same as the 16th overall player in other scoring systems with different lineup requirements.

 

[FantasyTrader]

You and others are missing some important points:

I don't think I'm really missing anything though. I think you're helping lend credence to my question.

The FBG dynasty rankings are NOT PPR, while the league that is the basis of this thread is a PPR league. BIG difference.

Big - I agree...but from 16th to 44th big?

The FBG rankings are based on starting 2 RB, 3 WR, and 1 TE, while this particular league starts 1 RB, 1 WR, 1 TE, and 3 flex (RB/WR/TE). Again, BIG difference.

Very good point you make here. I can see how this would have a huge impact.

If you can start 4 WRs in a PPR league in which you only are required to start 1 RB, and when you consider the average length of career between a RB and a WR, a WR has much more value than they would in a standard league that starts 2 RBs.

Wrong. The average length of both the RB's career and the WR's career should be taken into account in your rankings. This in no way explains the difference between staff's rankings and their thoughts "in draft".

Jeff T, the staff member in question, has a certain strategy he uses when he is in an initial dynasty draft, as he has explained.

Yes. And shouldn't this be reflected in his rankings? Strategy which he believes is most beneficial to helping customers win their leagues?

All of the above are part of the answer, but the key thing is the rankings are very generic and once you change lineups and scoring from those used in the rankings, the value of players can change dramatically. This doesn't even factor in the minute by minute changes in the draft as it proceeds nor does it factor in a persons specific strategy. As mentioned in a previous post, overall rankings also can't factor in position runs and roster breakdown.

There are too many variables in rankings even before you factor in difference scoring systems and different lineup requirements. The difference in FBG lineup used in rankings and the lineup requirements in Jeff's league are night and day different.

So you and I are in agreement. We're both questioning how helpful generic rankings even are to begin with when it looks like a customer has to hit quite the parlay of events just to make the staff's rankings applicable to the person's rules, scoring, team makeup, etc. etc. etc.

The 16th overall player in FBG scoring and FBG lineup requirements is definitely not the same as the 16th overall player in other scoring systems with different lineup requirements.

Already a very well established point throughout the thread. So we come full circle. Is the 16th player overall at least worth being taken 44th overall in other scoring systems with different lineup requirements?

 

[-OZ-]

this thread proves 2 points. 1. don't relay on anyones cheat sheets except your own. 2. If you want to out smart and beat your competion and so called experts like I do year in and year out you certainly don;t want to relay on the information they provide you. hehe

I subscribe to FBG for the tips and information they provide.

In no way do I actually use anything they put out as something to follow.

I do use there cheatseats to predict what others will do. Because I am fully aware

most owners in my leagues follow these things. That's where I have a huge advantage! And that's why I make tons of money each and every year and beat these guys year in and year out at there own game.

You da MAN!

(there, feel better about yourself?)